Goto Chockstone Home

  Guide
  Gallery
  Tech Tips
  Articles
  Reviews
  Dictionary
  Links
  Forum
  Search
  About

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

  Shop
Chockstone Photography
Australian Landscape Photography by Michael Boniwell
Australian Landscape Prints





Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

 Page 10 of 11. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 120 | 121 to 140 | 141 to 160 | 161 to 180 | 181 to 200 | 201 to 205
Author
Grampians Access 2019
kp
2-May-2019
1:22:11 PM
Hi Paula/Tracy,

Thank you for the update and hard work.

Is it possible to organise a clean up & ground stabilisation of spurt wall in the near future? I really think the base of this cliff needs help. Especially if it is one of the few cliffs remaining open.

Cheers
Kent
Access T CliffCare
2-May-2019
2:42:05 PM
On 2-May-2019 kp wrote:
>Hi Paula/Tracy,
>
>Thank you for the update and hard work.
>
>Is it possible to organise a clean up & ground stabilisation of spurt
>wall in the near future? I really think the base of this cliff needs help.
> Especially if it is one of the few cliffs remaining open.
>
>Cheers
>Kent

Hi,

I will look into this and get back to you. I think we did one of these many moons ago - Nov 2008.
Cheers.
laytons
17-Jun-2019
7:04:18 PM
Lockout Debate Ė Please Contact Legislative Council Members

Lockout Debate Ė Please Contact Legislative Council Members

Ithomas
18-Jun-2019
11:38:49 AM
Last night I read the Lock Out document presented on this forum by the ďAustralian Climbing Association (Vic) Inc.Ē. I wrote some comments and posted them on their site. Probably a waste of time.

My major concern is that having Liberal Democrat politicians representing rock climbers and current problems in the Gariwerd/Grampians will almost certainly not reflect well on the climbing community.

The Liberal Democrats have a far right agenda and a history of anti-green, sexist pronouncements and policies as well as being climate change sceptics. If thatís who you want to represent climbing in parliament, fair enough, but as a rock climber of 50 years standing I would rather give up climbing entirely than side with such a sorry bunch of wannabes.

Duang Daunk
18-Jun-2019
1:09:10 PM
On 18-Jun-2019 Ithomas wrote:
>The Liberal Democrats have a far right agenda and a history of anti-green, sexist pronouncements and policies as well as being climate change sceptics. If thatís who you want to represent climbing in parliament, fair enough, but as a rock climber of 50 years standing I would rather give up climbing entirely than side with such a sorry bunch of wannabes.

Strong words bro.
Also sounds a bit like youíre maybe getting a bit past it climbing wise if youíd give up a 50 yr passion of climbing for any political persuasion good, bad or otherwise.

The huge irony is that irrespective of any polly involvement we both may well have given up climbing in the Gramps because of a sorry bunch of wannabes.
Ithomas
18-Jun-2019
7:45:53 PM
On 18-Jun-2019 Duang Daunk wrote:

>Strong words bro.

Donít know you from a bar of soap but two things need to be said. 1. I am a little weaker than I used to be in my prime. 2. I am not your bro.

Duang Daunk
18-Jun-2019
8:02:01 PM
On 18-Jun-2019 Ithomas wrote:
>On 18-Jun-2019 Duang Daunk wrote:
>
>>Strong words bro.
>
>Donít know you from a bar of soap but two things need to be said. 1. I
>am a little weaker than I used to be in my prime. 2. I am not your bro.
>
Fair enough as the brotherhood / sisterhood of the climbing fraternity is seemingly well and truly fractured these days along the lines of the various genres involved anyway...

By the way, we have at least two things in common if your 50 year kicker hasnít cut in, as Iím certainly not a lover of the Liberal Democrats!
If I should ever meet you at the crag how would you like me to address you?
One Day Hero
18-Jun-2019
9:59:32 PM
On 18-Jun-2019 diddy wrote:

>No. Australian enjoyment of outdoor recreation does not trump cultural
>heritage. Nor does the fact that climbers have gone about bolting whatever
>they have liked for a couple of decades.

It's a trade off, mate. The whole country is stolen land, but I'm not going to just sit in my cubicle and be a good little consumer in a meaningless attempt to right the wrongs of the past. Most climbers are extremely supportive of indigenous rights, and I'm pretty sure an amicable negotiated solution could be reached. However, Parks has come out with all guns blazing and pulled some pretty sneaky dirty tricks. If they insist on setting this up as a fight, then fuch 'em, I will participate in that fight.
ithomas
19-Jun-2019
12:54:35 AM
DD: you can all me by my name: Ian.

ODH. Every single argument by climbers that I have heard concerning bans have all been said before by Mountain Cattle people, four-wheel drivers, trail bikers, mountain bikers, bee keepers, orchid enthusiasts, photographers. All of those groups, and more, seem to have a sense of entitlement based on their love of the natural world and their estimation of what constitutes long term use.
Getting angry and self indignant will not help.

Climbers will have to give something and it will hurt. Itís not a game and itís clear that the world of free access for all has changed since Wik, Mabo, land rights and increasing visitor pressures.

Climbers are not immune from the reality of how this will play out. Just as surfing changed from a handful of enthusiasts in the 60ís to an enormous publicity driven world of magazines, photographs, surf shops, surf schools, clothing businesses and now have to deal with a legacy of totally overcrowded waves, polluted camping spots and access regulations, so climbers have sewn the seeds of the present dispute. Not through malicious intent, just through entitlement and lazy thinking.
We have all participated.

I am sure the good people of Natimuk and various climbers groups have analysed the situation and developed plans. None will succeed if climbers are not prepared to relinquish some of that which was not theirs in the first place. Itís not a matter of winning. Itís a matter of adjusting to changes which will take effect over the coming decades.






[Moderator edited this post by adding some spaces between paragraphs to make it much easier to read!]
One Day Hero
19-Jun-2019
8:26:18 AM
On 19-Jun-2019 ithomas wrote:
>you can all me by my name: Ian.

Humzoo, I agree with a lot of the stuff you're saying, but our springy sounding friend also makes a solid point. You had your time on rock, got to do whatever the hell you wanted. Now that you're a washed up old fart, you've come to the gracious realization that climbers need to give up some of the best crags in the world. If this had arisen in 1981, I wonder if you would have been so chill?

Even at your prime, I doubt that you were capable of climbing the top shelf stuff in the Grampians and these days you wouldn't get off the ground, so you're not personally giving anything up. Take it from me, the climbing on Taipan is better than Ben Lomond and Booroomba, and I frigging love Ben Lomond and Booroomba.
Ithomas
19-Jun-2019
12:29:49 PM
ODH: What a crock of shite. Just because I could not climb today's stuff because of my age is no reason to dismiss my views. In fact, while I agree that I could not ever climb to such a standard, I fail to see any valid argument at all in that proposition. It seems to be a very defensive and weak line of attack. It's just not smart at all. The term which covers people who make such arguments is 'cunning but stupid' and it applies to those Liberal Democrats who were signalled at the start of this little discussion. I still have a life and more to the point, a brain. Doesn't matter how old it is! The proposition that I would have had a different point of view regarding these events if they had occurred in 1981 or even 1971 is laughable. The world has moved on, the climate has changed and arguments change. I have modified my views over time. Sensible in my view. The least serious but most laughable comment made is the absolute assertion that you know better than I (or anyone) about what constitutes a good cliff or good climbing. Tee Hee!
ithomas
19-Jun-2019
2:18:38 PM
Oh by the way, I have never that that I would be happy to see climbing bans. The point which you (ODH) seem to have missed is that climbers will have to give some concessions in order that climbing has a viable future. For climbers to simply react and plead that they have some automatic right to bolt cliffs is to invite cliff closures. For example; maybe guiding companies need to employ an indigenous consultant with all large beginner groups in order that connection to country can be demonstrated to newcomers. Maybe, climbers could co-operate in helping to maintain explanatory signs in regard to significant places. Maybe climbers might respectfully give indigenous spokes-people a tour of the mount or Taipan Wall. Maybe climbers could re-name some significant areas with indigenous names. Maybe a proposed Australian Climbing Museum in Natimuk might contain an indigenous room/story or presence of some sort. Maybe climbers might have to voluntarily stop climbing in certain areas which are designated as significant by indigenous groups. There are heaps of things which climbers could do in order to engender graceful co-operation and hopefully stave off the prospect of total closures. I think I have said enough. Think it through while bearing in mind the full force of historical societal changes which have been occurring across the continent over the past 200 years. Get it wrong and everyone will be the poorer.
One Day Hero
19-Jun-2019
10:04:03 PM
On 19-Jun-2019 Ithomas wrote:
>ODH: What a crock of shite. Just because I could not climb today's stuff
>because of my age is no reason to dismiss my views. In fact, while I agree
>that I could not ever climb to such a standard, I fail to see any valid
>argument at all in that proposition.

Really? You have have no skin in the game, Ian. Of course you're prepared to give up some crags. You've probably never visited those crags and wouldn't be able to climb on them anyway. When it comes to Taipan, how is your opinion more worthwhile than that of Agnes from Toorak commenting on an ABC article ("Those climbers should just find other cliffs climb on, or stick to artificial walls")? Fuch! If this whole thing had blown up in 2030, I'd just hang up the boots and call it good on climbing. Unfortunately, problems have arrived a decade early. I'm still in reasonable form and have ambitions in that bit of the world.

>The term which covers
>people who make such arguments is 'cunning but stupid'

Sounds like the sort of thing someone might say if they're educated and credentialed, but their arguments are so full of holes that you could drive a truck through with a billboard on the back which says "this is a pile of shit".

>The least serious but most laughable comment made is the absolute assertion
>that you know better than I (or anyone) about what constitutes a good cliff
>or good climbing. Tee Hee!

In this instance I do know better than you, because you lack first hand experience. Taipan and some of the banned Vic Range crags host a handful of the best pitches on planet Earth. I've recently been running around doing a few of the classics which you and John Smart put up on Ororral Ridge, and they're absolutely fantastic......but they pale into insignificance compared to the Grampians routes. Not the same league, not even the same sport.
Dave J
19-Jun-2019
10:41:41 PM
ODH this fight your talking about. Its like a PV child shaking up a bottle of climbers and traditional owners to see if they fight. I will not partake.

If a site is sacred to traditional owners, I dont want to climb there, end of story. If me climbing somewhere is inconvenient to PV development plans, that bother me not at all.

I have spent about 3000 days in the grampians in non-tourist areas and on 3 occasions I have seen someone who wasn't a climber. 0.1% is odds I can take.

If it turns out that traditional owners and PV ideas of significant areas and zoning are truly in alignment, I won't contest that. I wlll just sell and move

PS as a footnote...my children are currently being challenged by reading articles in the newspapers about themselves, as climbers, being racist vandals, poo dumpers, rock crushers, eco-terrorists, etc... Without being black or gay this might be as close as they ever get to vilification and stereotyping. maybe this is good soft entry-point to that world (and healthy scepticism of main stream media) for them. This may be the key take-away positive of the current victorian climbing shut-down experience for me.
One Day Hero
19-Jun-2019
11:34:54 PM
On 19-Jun-2019 Dave J wrote:
>If it turns out that traditional owners and PV ideas of significant areas
>and zoning are truly in alignment, I won't contest that. I wlll just sell
>and move

If Araps gets banned, the Nati property market will be a train crash worth watching :)
Ithomas
20-Jun-2019
6:24:12 AM
ODH: Maybe you should focus on the main game here which is how to fit rock climbing into a new future where Indigenous rights are protected and climbers still able to climb. It would be possible if climbers approach the crisis in good faith. The problem will not go away or be dismissed with talk about fights or climbers rights. To borrow a phrase: Indigenous people always have been and always will be struggling to regain their rights. Climbers, like any other interest group have to come to terms with that struggle. You have hijacked this discussion with ill considered comments about my climbing history. I think you should stop obsessing about that. You do not know what I have climbed (itís much more than you think) and in any case, my climbing history is totally irrelevant to the discussion. If I were a suspicious type I might suspect that have been stalking me. If thatís the case, you need to improve your surveillance techniques. Your real estate comment is premature and off the mark too. People of Natimuk might consider that the future holds an opportunity for the area to remain a Mecca for climbing as well as a focus for indigenous and environmentally friendly tourism. Playing the smart-arse and cursing will not give you entry into the real discussion.
Wendy
20-Jun-2019
7:59:05 AM
I'm so happy to see a few other objectors to working with the Lib Dems come out of the woodwork. It's been disturbing to see a whole hearted embrace of them by many, just because their angry words happen to coalign with climber's angry words on a small aspect of their policies. It seems incredibly narrow thinking.

https://wendiferously.blogspot.com/2019/06/are-raving-libertarians-good-bedfellows.html

https://wendiferously.blogspot.com/2019/06/whats-wrong-with-working-with-lib-dems.html
gfdonc
20-Jun-2019
10:26:46 AM
It's amusing for me to see several of you climb (sorry) onto a soapbox of party-politik as a result of a pretty simplistic motion being put forward.
FWIW I watched the whole debate streaming live (I had a day off for other reasons), then wrote to Bev McArthur and Andy Meddick afterwards. It's unfortunate that David Limbrick was cut short due to time constraints as he made good points in the 2 minutes he had, and I'm sure was well prepped with other input.
I had to look up which party each person represents, but did it make any difference? In the end the Greens candidate had the least insights IMHO and the Libs and Animal Justice seemed to be flying the flag.
If you're a Labour voter and were expecting Gayle Tierney to beat the drum about mismanagement of the situation well, you haven't worked out how politics worked have you? She was only going to represent the establishment view. The dynamics are that the members in opposition get to ask the hard questions and score points off the incumbent government. So they're furthering our cause right now, regardless of what other political and social agendas they may wish to further.
Apart from the delight in hearing "grade 28" uttered in Parliament (as if anyone knew what that meant) one key take-away I got from yesterday is that the issue of access to public lands is far broader than the climbing community. We may be getting a lot of press at present but there are many groups affected by changes in legislation and land management and maybe the broader issue will only be solved at a legislative level.

Oh and to address Diddy's rant:
> Australian enjoyment of outdoor recreation does not trump cultural heritage
Well the motion doesn't say that. Read it again perhaps??

Tastrad
20-Jun-2019
10:55:22 AM
Taipan sucks donkey dicks... compared to Ben Lomond. So different in style, so trad...a different sport altogether. Damo donkey boy would be too scared to leave the ground at Africa, let alone be bothered to forsake convenience and quickdraws to walk 3 hrs to get there in the first place.

Let's hope Parks Tasmania doesn't get the same ideas as Parks Vic... bolting in National Parks was always a bad idea and unsustainable environmentally. Ben Lomond is bolt free, but there is a bloody great ski field on top. I only know of Aboriginal culturally sensitive climbing venues at areas such as Rocky Cape and Sisters Beach. I don't know about Freycinet, Tasman Peninsula, Kunanyi... Hey Zoo, any ideas where we might face the same issues in Tassie?
ithomas
20-Jun-2019
12:05:13 PM
Hi Gerry
Because of my work experience I know where many sensitive sites are located but the answer to your question is of course to consult with the Aboriginal community. Be aware that even though it is the right course of action it could open a Pandora's Box of complications which can only be resolved by genuine openness on the part of climbers.
In my opinion it is best to step forward with propositions that involve the community in some way, perhaps in a manner similar to that which I detailed earlier. If not, at some time in the future the baleful eye of Tasmanian management will inevitably turn towards climbers. It's not a shoot from the hip exercise and there are no shortcuts. Plenty of evidence from North and Central Australia regarding just how complex these matters are.
'Zoo

 Page 10 of 11. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 120 | 121 to 140 | 141 to 160 | 161 to 180 | 181 to 200 | 201 to 205
There are 205 messages in this topic.

 

Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Landscape Photos Australia

Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.



Australian Panoramic | Australian Coast | Australian Mountains | Australian Countryside | Australian Waterfalls | Australian Lakes | Australian Cities | Australian Macro | Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo | Landscape Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Fine Art Photography | Wilderness Photography | Nature Photo | Australian Landscape Photo | Stock Photography Australia | Landscape Photos | Panoramic Photos | Panoramic Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | High Country Mountain Huts | Mothers Day Gifts | Gifts for Mothers Day | Mothers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Mothers Day | Wedding Gift Ideas | Christmas Gift Ideas | Fathers Day Gifts | Gifts for Fathers Day | Fathers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Fathers Day | Landscape Prints | Landscape Poster | Limited Edition Prints | Panoramic Photo | Buy Posters | Poster Prints